'signing' and 'grant'

[Jesus Angeles]

Hi,
I have revised the java.policy and put:

grant {
permission java.security.AllPermission;
};

Now, I am adding the 'signing' of the jar.

Has signing an applet/jar got anything to do with the 'grant' access? Or are they 2 totally independent factors?

[Ulf Dittmer]

They both accomplish the same thing, more or less. If you have the AllPermission in place, then signing the applet shouldn't be necessary.

[Jesus Angeles]

Thanks.

Is it possible to specify 'grants' (give grants) together with the signing of the jar?

As of now, I removed the

grant {
permission java.security.AllPermission;
};

and add specific grants (e.g. io read on 'c:/tmp/*').

[Ulf Dittmer]

Signing the jar file also grants all permissions, so adding further permissions in the policy file would have no effect.

[Jesus Angeles]

Ulf Dittmer wrote:Signing the jar file also grants all permissions, so adding further permissions in the policy file would have no effect.

Thank you for the reply.

When I deployed the signed version of the jar (using self-signed certificate), I did get a pop up asking me if I want to allow the applet to run, and trust the publisher.

However, there was no change in the permitted actions of the applet.

The applet still doesnt have permission to do stuff, like io reads.

That is why I added those 'grants' in the java.policy.

I wonder if there is something wrong with regards to my signing, or the certificate. Is what you mentioned true also on 'self-signed' certificates?

[Ulf Dittmer]

That's odd. As far as the applet is concerned, all certificates are equal, so if the user accepts it then all permissions are granted to the applet.